In a time where Freedom of Speech has caused many controversial debates, it has become essential to understand the value of this freedom in our society. Although Freedom of Speech certainly comes with its downsides, it plays a necessary function to humans in nature as well as our government because it allows for moral comparisons and subjectivity. “Whatever can be proved to be good, must be so by being shown to be as a means to something admitted to be good without proof”, (Mill p.3). Here Mill begins to introduce the root cause for utilitarianism, which he depicts in this section as the ideology to follow whatever action benefits the majority. He does so by supporting the notion that disagreement and scrutiny between moral beliefs allows …show more content…
This argument is often made because in theory we could be the individual who faces silencing of our belief if it is intended to harm others. Although this argument may seem sound at first, if we further examine utilitarianism we can recognize that the harm principle states that the goal is never to infringe on one 's individual freedom as long as it doesn 't harm others. This idea is ultimately still in favor of supporting individual’s beliefs because its very purpose is to benefit the vast majority who may be affected by harmful speech.
As expressed, Freedom of Speech is vital towards maintaining a healthy society because of its ability to contrast opposing beliefs and find moral truths. Not only does this principle aid in supporting the individual mentally, but as a society it encourages new ideas that lead to innovation. Finally, Freedom of Speech prevents the state from gaining to much power. Without citizens having the right to certain moral beliefs the government could potentially censor its population in order to gain complete power within the
Freedom of speech is a right that was given to Americans some time ago. It is the most cherished right Americans have. People would not be able to express themselves without it. They would not be the same person without it. In Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbur, the lack of speech was protrayed through the characteristics of Guy Montags job as a Fireman and their society and government.
I will attempt to justify that John Stuart Mills approach to the argument of Freedom of Speech is the most valid, and the only instance where expression should be limited is where it causes an immediate harm or violation to the rights of others. I believe that expression should be limited when it causes harm to others or violates their rights. This view coincides with J.S Mill’s “Harm Principle”. I do not believe that hate speech should be prohibited as it merely
Whether it is at the dinner table or in my family’s group text message, the conversation about my brother’s custody battle with my mother’s side of the family seems to remain a bitter topic, especially when discussing my role in it. When my father physically harmed my brother to the extent to which he had to go to the emergency room, the custody trial over my brother and me began. After several sources provided the judge with accusations against my father, I was the final source that needed to assert or deny my father’s abuse; with heavy consideration, I decided to lie to the judge by denying my father’s abuse. Under the principle of utilitarianism, philosophers would infer that lying is permissible if the consequences of doing so are good.
This essential right is protected by law, and listed immediately in the text. This truly highlights just how important it is to be able to speak, write, and share ideas freely. Information should not be denied based off of one group’s views. Our founding fathers stood up for this right, one that does not include censorship of any kind. To have a law that goes against this principle invalidates the law itself.
Religion is a moral compass that dictates what a person should and should not do. Moreover, the Declaration allows people to teach their religion to others, which strengthens the bonds between souls. Therefore, freedom to pass down and educate about personal beliefs allows societies to flourish. Furthermore, freedom of speech is a right given to people. The government assures they will not censor opinions when it states, “Congress shall not make no law...abridging the freedom of speech or of the press,” in the Bill of Rights, (B).
The article argues that the courts should only view harmful speech in the same eyes and rule them the same as if they were conduct harms. The source then discusses how many scholars believe that freedom of speech only applies when the benefits outweigh the harms, regarding what is being said. The article does a good job of approaching the problem through a semi-neutral lens. The article clearly lets its opinion be known at times; however, it approaches the opposite side of the argument in a fair manner. The article will be incredibly beneficial because it discusses when freedom of speech should not apply with a neutral approach.
Many articles have been written on the controversial nature of the Westboro Baptist Church. One such article is titled “A funeral for free speech?” by David Hudson Jr. and Ronald Collins. In this article, the two scholars argue that freedom of speech should be upheld even in the instance of funeral protests. They write that “even if the messages of the funeral protesters are offensive, one of the core purposes of the First Amendment is to protect offensive, obnoxious, and even repugnant speech. ”[20] The authors do not condone the hateful nature of the protests but recognize that they are indeed protected by the Constitution.
Freedom of speech is an important Constitutional Issue that gives us the individual right to express the way we feel. Having freedom of speech in public, in newspapers, books, or media is a part that makes us the land of the free. Without freedom of speech we couldn’t say what we think without getting in trouble What we say can either make our community stronger, or it could tear it apart. It was August 28 1963 and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was about to start his speech.
The First Amendment that allows us to have Free Speech is by far probably one of the most important rights we have. One could say that Freedom of speech is as American as eating boiled peanuts at a football game, but the problem is not everyone may like boiled peanuts or football. This right gives people the opportunity to say what’s on their mind without fear of reprisal even if it offends others. Freedoms of speech rights have been interpreted differently throughout history and those interpretations have been questioned many different times, in many different ways.
Introduction: John Stuart Mill essay on Consideration On representative Government, is an argument for representative government. The ideal form of government in Mill's opinion. One of the more notable ideas Mill is that the business of government representatives is not to make legislation. Instead Mill suggests that representative bodies such as parliaments and senates are best suited to be places of public debate on the various opinions held by the population and to act as watchdogs of the professionals who create and administer laws and policy.
The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America grants the right to free speech a status superior than that of the other rights. Specifically the First Amendment disallows Congress from establishing any laws controlling the freedom of speech. American jurisprudence establishes the importance right of free speech, which enables proactive engagement on contemporary challenges by the citizenry ensuring extensive and vigorous public dialogue.
The Importance of Freedom of Speech Every person deserves the right to speak about whatever they want, whenever they want. It does not matter if the person is rich or poor, good or bad, because all opinions matter. Freedom of speech is a person's right to express their opinions as much as they please. Just like in the novel “Haroun and the Sea of Stories”, the enemies, the Chupwalas, made a vow to be silent.
The fact that one has the right to say and believe is the foundation for democracy to function. If no one dared to say their opinions, then it had become a dictatorship where only one opinion on how society and the country should work had been the “right”. If people dared to express their opinions, they will help improving the society one lives. Freedom of speech gives one the responsibility to consider what fits into different contexts, and it will make us better persons and people. Simply, people will feel safe in the society they live in.
Being Free 1st draft Freedom is word used in a lot of contexts, but the official meaning of the word is “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants” (Freedom). Meaning that you have the right to do something, with the focus being on you as an individual. This means no one can tell you what to do, like for example a state. This is an important aspect and part of political theory. Liberty is also used and viewed as the same category of theory, and has the definition “The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s behavior or political views” (Liberty).
1.0 INTRODUCTION In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), freedom of speech falls under the Article 19 which is the freedom of opinion and expression. It protects one’s freedom ‘to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers’ (The United Nations, 1948). Article 19(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) adds that the freedom of expression could be ‘either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice’. Besides being an individual’s fundamental liberty of expression, Santa Clara University School of Law Professor Russell W. Galloway (1991) states that free speech is the ‘matrix of all other freedoms’.